Reality????? - Page 3

Originally posted by: SayaneeH.Lecter

beautiful post.. at the very beginning you said the ultimate truth .. history is written by winners to glorify winners as well as to demean who lose .. if durya was an ultimate villain he wouldn't have spoke against caste-ism .. not once he did it in several moments and I found there is a temple of Dury in Kerala for the same reason .. a friend like Duryadhan is a priceless possession to one

had Yudhisthir that good he would never ever bet his wife, was pandavas true valiant they were not so mum in the game of dice ..

undoubtedly Mahabharat is written supporting winners trying to mask truths sometime with supernatural stories sometime imposed one dimensional perspective of dharma ..

still as it is a literature truth is bound to be out there .. may be with the veil of allegory or metaphor .. authors do it often to save truth for future .. they expect readers in future will develop an eye to see and a mind to think with logic

But with time often stories become religion then asking conventional thoughts becomes an taboo .. we see it everywhere but still people do .. still human beings with illusion-free mind seek for the truth behind the words and find it .. don't know religious belief is stronger or the human rationality only can expect future wont go by the book but will try to dig the truth out and when religion will be synonymous to Truth n humanity .. only

your right Duryodhan, didnt have any prejudice in making friends, but does that mean he was especially selfless. most of his friends were people who hated the Pandavas or Krishan.

Originally posted by: merrydock

your right Duryodhan, didnt have any prejudice in making friends, but does that mean he was especially selfless. most of his friends were people who hated the Pandavas or Krishan.

it is well clasified that Karna was loyal to Duryodhan souly because he thought himself greatly in debt with him for making him the king of Angg. even when he knew he was Kunti son and had to fight his own brothers he remained loyal to Duryodhan.

to question whether Duryodhan was not really a bad person and did bad things but was potrayed as a bad person because he lost the war, will only pose question like what is really dharma and adarma? should people really consider the story of the mahabharat and see parallel in understanding and solving conflicts in their own lives.

is the Mahabharat just a book used to glorify a victorious king and nothing to do with life or good and Bad?

do we take every thing we understand as good and conclude that Krishan was on the wrong side and Duryodhan was just and unlucky guy who lost a very fair claim?

or shouldent we simply take it as a tale our ancestors and created to teach us about life, the good and the evil and leave it at that instead of trying to find out who was really in the right or the wrong 5000 years back.?

Yudisthar liked to gamble fine. it tells us what we know already gambling is a bad habit.

Duryodhan was selfish greedy and envious. and didnt want to share his family inheritance with his cousins. right that happens today as well in our everyday lives as well as in our society and politics.

ditrastha supported his son and spoiled him rotten. it is surely a lesson for parents who give their children what ever they want. but values.

like the pandavs who performed some minor evils for a greater good. this too is a fact of life. nothing is only black or only white, there are shades or gray and others colours in life too.

brother killing brother to be no 1 is a tale as old as time. and is prevalent in our society and the world around us. nothing has changed in that aspect.

so why question something that we should only learn from.?

and the Ultimate truth is today we can never know what really happened 5000 years back or 100 years back. "truth" truly exist only in the present and not in the past. the past is only hearsay. and we can only understand it the way we persive it

well it's just a debate. just take an example of India's freedom struggle. we have 3 version or may be four one indian version one pakistani and one english version. in Indian version english officers were blamed for most of bad things like partisan and in pakistani version Gandhi is mocked. i haven't read english version but have heard that Jallianwala bagh was appreciated there.

it is this context i m talking. it's not like that Duryodhan has done everything bad. he also did gud things which are not highlighted as much. it's about knowing the story from different perspective.

i feel Vyas wrote the epic rather objectively. it was the following generations which categorised the characters of this epic into evil, bad & good. there is a flaw in almost all characters that i can think of in MB. dury was a proud man, but wat about draupadi ? wen she insulted her father in law & bro in law; did she really called dhrit andha or was it BRC's imagination? if she did then it is qute trashy as she is supposedly a scholar & a beauty. wat is the point of all that physical beauty if the person is narrow minded like that ? may be that is the reason y arjuna loved subhadra more, for the latter's humility & innocence. but that does not mean i am supporting the actions of dury during the dice game. i had asked my grandmom countless times y yudhi is called dharmaputra wen his actions show him as a gross sexist. y on earth did pandavas sat quiet wen their wife was getting abused ? evri 1 who call pandavas 'dharmatmas' r silent on that point.

Originally posted by: gowri122

i know, pandavas suffered tremendously from their chilhood. may be it was bad karma from kunti's side in abandoning her 1st born baby. i can forgive her action at that 1 time bcoz she was a teen. but wat she later did to karna is the worst. i feel she never loved karna, not even 4 a second., he was always a shame to her, nothing else. she emotionally blackmailed him to get her sons' lives spared. in MB i hate kunti the most. there is no excuse 4 wat she did to karna. i am glad that karna saw thru her trick & refused to accept her as his mom. in the end evri body got the results 4 their actions:

1. for abandoning karna by kunti pandavas suffered so much during their childhood. they became fatherless their very lineage questioned by evri1 & ultimately pointing finger at kunti's character (or the lack of it).

2. draupadi's arrogance about her lineage & beauty (led to her dismissal of karna as unworthy to marry her with out knowing his gud heart ), but fate brought her to a condition where she was demoted to the status of a dasi at virata, all courtesy of her great husbands'deeds (which ofcourse she blamed it completely on kauravas & karna). her attitude against her co wives, denying their rights to live with their husbands, but arjuna loved subhadra more in the end. all draupadi cud do was look on helplessly wen her fave hubby brought subhadra to indraprasth . at the end of the war, it wasn't her sons but subhadra's grandson who became the nxt emperor. so pride indeed goes b4 a fall.

3. karna 4 his part in the dice game related incidents was tagged an adharmi despite being pure hearted.

4.dury who poisoned bheema & tried to kill him, in the end he himself lost his life in a battle of broken rules.

5.bhishma for not taking his responsibility 2wards the country above his love for the father, saw his dynasty fall apart in front of his eyes. also his part in abducting girls against their wishes became the cause of his agony & terrible sufferings b4 his death.

6.drona 4 using hastinapur to avenge the wrongs against him, in the end his son, whom he made a king without checking if he had the qualities to rule a country or not, did not even attain moksha.

7.pandavas for the all blood shed nevr again attained peace in their life time. krishna 4 his part in the war saw his own clan members destroying each other.

8.gandhari 4 blinding herself saw her children go into the path of destruction under the influence of shakuni.

9.dhrit for his ambition saw all his kids die.

im not going to enlist evri character but this is the msg that i found in MB. if we do things that r bound to hurt others we vil pay 4 it no matter wat, may b 2morrow, a week later or yrs after...

Originally posted by: mannu_minnie

well it's just a debate. just take an example of India's freedom struggle. we have 3 version or may be four one Indian version one pakistani and one english version. in Indian version english officers were blamed for most of bad things like partisan and in pakistani version Gandhi is mocked. i haven't read english version but have heard that Jallianwala bagh was appreciated there.

it is this context i m talking. it's not like that Duryodhan has done everything bad. he also did gud things which are not highlighted as much. it's about knowing the story from different perspective.

Originally posted by: mannu_minnie

wow it is better. i m a fan of ur writing.

u know we used to had a chapter in our hindi syllabus in 9th class where author has written about the last night of Duryodhan and his chat with Yudishthir. that was awesome chapter where Duryodhan told his side and even asked Yudi to call him Suyodhan - his original name.

when i was a kid , Ramayan and Mahabharat used to be the ultimate truth for me and they were the absolutely right for me. but after raeding tat chapter my thinking towards mahabharat changed and the movie "Lajja" changed my view about Ramayan. after tat i have read many books and discussion about it.

My question regarding Duryodhan and Karan friendship is, would Duryodhan have befriended Karan if he was not a great warrior? Did he himself marry anybody blow his caste to prove his point etc.?

Originally posted by: satiisparvati

My question regarding Duryodhan and Karan friendship is, would Duryodhan have befriended Karan if he was not a great warrior? Did he himself marry anybody blow his caste to prove his point etc.?

Originally posted by: gowri122

i feel Vyas wrote the epic rather objectively. it was the following generations which categorised the characters of this epic into evil, bad & good. there is a flaw in almost all characters that i can think of in MB. dury was a proud man, but wat about draupadi ? wen she insulted her father in law & bro in law; did she really called dhrit andha or was it BRC's imagination? if she did then it is qute trashy as she is supposedly a scholar & a beauty. wat is the point of all that physical beauty if the person is narrow minded like that ? may be that is the reason y arjuna loved subhadra more, for the latter's humility & innocence. but that does not mean i am supporting the actions of dury during the dice game. i had asked my grandmom countless times y yudhi is called dharmaputra wen his actions show him as a gross sexist. y on earth did pandavas sat quiet wen their wife was getting abused ? evri 1 who call pandavas 'dharmatmas' r silent on that point.